Why Does The Black Progressive-Fundamentalist Get To "Own" The Struggle For Black Economic Development But Is Never Forced To Pay Earnest Money To The Investors Before They Take Another Step With Him?

• Within The Black Community Blog - Jan 4, 2008 - "The Void Between The Election Night Celebration And 'The Promised Land' "
• The 5/5ths Equal Human Being Strategy Playbook Blog - Aug 2009  Who Measures The Effectiveness In Generating The "UN-Least Of These"?

Take a step back and seek to categorize the majority of the economic arguments heard from the most vocal Black Progressive-Fundamentalists.

All of them point to the persistent "Income Inequality" and then make the charge that "economic and social justice has been violated'.

Wait a minute.
How much of the investments have they received over a long period of time with the promises of development?  They took control over the key institutions of these same cities (and states) and when it comes time for the "rank & file" to demand to see the balance of their "community 401k statement" various progressive-fundamentalists voices choose to "Occupy" - flipping the script by changing the terms of the indictment.

Has A Progressive Ever Been Fired For Taking The Community Investments But Failing The Black Community?

Harry Belafonte:

So many of the gains of that movement have been lost, he charged, ticking off decimated and disinvested inner-city communities devoid of a middle class; continuing disparities yielding low funding of public education and high incarceration rates of minority youth; and high poverty and unemployment rates that still more greatly afflict minorities

When I listen to Mr Belafonte's framing I notice that he appears to have no concept of the obligation that the new regime of power that took over the various "Mission Accomplished Cities" had in their responsibility to retain an economically viable city.   In as much as these cities grew powerful as industrial hearth furnaces that generated enormous economic prosperity in aggregate the machines that control the reigns of political power today appear to be let off of the hook because they continue to talk more in terms of "social justice" than they express the competency to fill the void in productive engagements for the "least of these" to perform.

Yes, yes - we hear them talking about "living wages", unions and workers rights.  These are lofty goals.   Upon further inspection we should understand that theirs is a specialty of forcing the ownership class to respect the rights of those who are selling their labor.   Their more difficult task is in organically creating more "consumers of labor" who agree to make a purchase at the price points for labor that they recognize as "social justice".   In economic terms the intersection of the labor supply curve and the consumer demand curve - artificially made higher because of their mandates.

.“But all of these truths do not exempt him from the moral responsibility that he has in his governance of this country. What Dr. King taught us was that without an angry people, without the poor rising up in indignation against their conditions, our leaders will never be pushed to do what they must do.”

Mr Belafonte - a man who is set in his ways, can't bring himself to see that TO-DAMNED-DAY the conditions are far different than they were when he "Marched With Doctor King".   The majority of the seats of power that he used to protest against are now customized - per the people's demands.  They are occupated with "favorable progressives", thus nullifying the intensity of the protests, lest the masses protest against themselves.

I can list no less than 10 Black Progressive-Fundamentalist opinion givers that jumped on the claim that Republican Mitt Romney "doesn't care about the poor'.   What none of them can express any measure of transparency on and admit is:

1. Mitt Romney nor any other Republican is going to get the balance of the investments in ballots from 'the least of these'
2. Those who present themselves as "defenders of the interests of the poor" can't bring themselves to remind THEMSELVES about their past as 'Investment Advisers", detailing what they compelled the masses to invest in over the years
3. In the year 2016 as yet another presidential campaign is upon us there is no condition that the poor people could face that would motivate them to return to their 2012 archives and defend what they sold at this, our present time.